The Iraq thread 4

[Major Fubar 0]

Wrong kid.

I would strongly suggest you call fellow forum members by their names, rather than condescending epithets, lest it be considered flaming.

[Lamont 0]

Quote[/b] ]I would strongly suggest you call fellow forum members by their names, rather than condescending epithets, lest it be considered flaming.

Ok lol, your the boss : )

wex-q, I am from the US. But I was born in Eastern Europe.

[billybob2002 0]

I still can't believe that someone thinks Iraq is just the Coalition versus the insurgents and everything will stabilize after the Coalition pulls out. The Coalition versus the insurgency is more of a sidebar compared to the ethnic violence between the Shitte and the Sunni. Civilians are probably more likely die in the ethnic violence than in the fight between the Coalition and the insurgency. I talked to number of people who favored pulling out not just because of insurgency but due to the ethnic violence. Simply, why waste American blood if they enjoy killing themselves?

Oh, stop bringing up Vietnam because Vietnam didn't have the ethnic issues like Iraq does. It adds a whole new dimension.

[Sc@tterbrain 0]

Quote[/b] ]It's best not to quote history when you don't know history.  

The fact is that when the Americans pulled out of Vietnam, tens of thousands were imprisioned and executed.  Doctors, teachers and those that "collaberated with Americans" were sent to reeducation camps or simply shot.  

Following that came the international humanitarian crisis as millions attempted to flee the country, the invasion of Cambodia to fight the Khmer Rouge (which is responsible itself for the deaths of an estimated 1.5 million people), and a breif run-in with the Chinese.

You call that stability?

Stability did come in the mid-80's when Vietnam adopted a semi free-market which capitalized on their cheap labor.

Its better not to be a smart ass when you don't know much.  Of course collaborators were imprisoned, of course there were executions.  Those were happening in communist countries by default.  Political prisoners imprisoned, etc.

We were told that all the dominos will fall and all hell will break lose.  All the region will turn communism and millions will die.   Well that didn't happen now did it?  So my point still stands.  

The scenario that we were told to what really happened is very different.  Same with Iraq at the moment.  So sorry if you didn't read right.

Hello?  The region did turn Communist.  (Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos)  Then they fought each other and Millions did die.

Try reading my post again, or maybe pick up a history book on the topic.

Do not let your hate for the US or the current administration be so great as to disallow you to think clearly.

Bashing the Administration that lead us into this war, or making a claim as to the stupidity or recklessness of our endevour in Iraq, I cannot dismiss given the current state of affairs.

But falsely quoting history makes you look foolish.

Edit* Billybob I agree.  Comparing the two was annoying, but not even getting the historical context right.....

 

This however is a blow to any thoughts on a positive outcome...

China arms both sides

[Gisen 0]

Vietnam did not turn communist. There's *never* been a communist government on this planet. There have been several socialist governments that have claimed to be working towards communism, but calling them communist is like calling "The Democratic Republic of Congo" a democracy.

And Lamont's right, the doomsday scenario America claimed to be protecting the world from (a huge explosion of socialist countries working towards communism) from did not happen.

[Sc@tterbrain 0]

Vietnam did not turn communist.  There's *never* been a communist government on this planet.  There have been several socialist governments that have claimed to be working towards communism, but calling them communist is like calling "The Democratic Republic of Congo" a democracy.

And Lamont's right, the doomsday scenario America claimed to be protecting the world from (a huge explosion of socialist countries working towards communism) from did not happen.

Ok remove the misused term "communist" and insert "socialist"... the point remains the same, his history was wrong and the example is inapplicable.

Please don't try to change his wording in order to make a pointless argument.

We have already established the true historical facts, and that Vietnam is a bad example. If you just want to be disagreeable at least get back on topic.

To move the discussion in that direction...

This article This however is a blow to my hopes for a positive outcome.

Playing both sides

[Gisen 0]

We have already established the true historical facts, and that Vietnam is a bad example. If you just want to be disagreeable at least get back on topic.

Perhaps you missed this point the first time:

Lamont's right, the doomsday scenario America claimed to be protecting the world from (a huge explosion of socialist countries working towards communism) from did not happen.

That was on topic.

[pmd 0]

i'm in the marine corp and i was on the 15th MEU. we were there 5-6 months and we did a lot of crap

helicopter raids, convoy's, Patrols artillery support (my MOS) and TCP duty.

my squad got engaged several times. not really going to talk about it but i got hit by a mortar and recieved the purple heart due to it (i'm back to full duty and we deploy again around august)

we're doing good over there. life is becoming normal again.

the town i was at (AR Rutbah) is doing A LOT better now. before people really couldn't have weddings openly because the insurgents would do something horrible to the family. now wedding celebrations are spilling into the streets. schools are opening back up. Iraqi Police are actually doing they're jobs now.

Marine Opinion: what's the war about? terrorism. where are all the terrorists? iraq. sqrew it... lets stay and kill them all

[chops 111]

Marine Opinion: what's the war about? terrorism. where are all the terrorists? iraq. sqrew it... lets stay and kill them all

If you replace 'terrorists' with 'US sodliers', you have what I imagine is the view of a lot of Iraqis.

[Necromancer- 0]

Marine Opinion: what's the war about? terrorism. where are all the terrorists? iraq. sqrew it... lets stay and kill them all  

If you replace 'terrorists' with 'US sodliers', you have what I imagine is the view of a lot of Iraqis.

I find your view one-sided...

Not every US-soldier is there to make a hell of every Iraqi civilian.

By the way.. not every "Communist" country went wrong. Take a look at Singapore. Yes there was a dictator, yes he imprisoned political opposition leaders, yes he ruled the country with an iron fist..

But look at the results: low crimes, extremely low corruption, strong economy.

[chops 111]

I find your view one-sided...

Not every US-soldier is there to make a hell of every Iraqi civilian.

You include my quote, but then refute I claim I never made in it?

By the way.. not every "Communist" country went wrong. Take a look at Singapore. Yes there was a dictator, yes he imprisoned political opposition leaders, yes he ruled the country with an iron fist..

But look at the results: low crimes, extremely low corruption, strong economy.

It's true that there are vast complexities to the whole process of government and capitalism = good, communism = bad is a simpletons view of the world. However I'd rather not be hung for having illegal plant extract, like this poor fool. A nice, clean orderly place, run by very fiscally-sound, savages.

To bring this back on topic. Iraq won't see any form of effective gorvernment in the next decade, communist, capitalist, democracy, police state. It's now a failed state that is a training ground for those with an axe to grind (for good reasons) against the US and coalition dupes. The only hope for stability lies in resurecting Sadam.

[ran 0]

By the way.. not every "Communist" country went wrong. Take a look at Singapore. Yes there was a dictator, yes he imprisoned political opposition leaders, yes he ruled the country with an iron fist..

But look at the results: low crimes, extremely low corruption, strong economy.

One thing is sure, I'm not going to singapore. I could be charged with so many offenses on a two day stay that I'd be off of a pretty large wad of cash and even possibly one life ... (I mean, no chewing gum, no pornography, no oral sex, no bungee jumping, no walking around naked in my hotel room, no cigs, forced to flush in public toilets, no littering, no peeing in the streets, no soft recreative drugs, no crossing the streets outside the marks ....)

[Commando84 0]

singapore sounds like a bad country, im lucky im not living there then

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]singapore sounds like a bad country, im lucky im not living there then

I guess everyone who has actually been there for some times will tell a very different story. I love the town. Period.

[Hoot1988 0]

yeah i agree with Balschoiw, dont knock it till you've been the rules may be strict but its a nice place. went to visit my uncle who was working their for a bit. never realized it was communist tho until it was mention tho. Remember communism isn't all bad western capitalism can't work and wont work for every nation. in some cases communism works for it. The bad form of communism is Lennism and Stalinism. the problem with communism is that it requires people to agree, and well they don't

Quote[/b] ] mean, no chewing gum, no pornography, no oral sex, no bungee jumping, no walking around naked in my hotel room, no cigs, forced to flush in public toilets, no littering, no peeing in the streets, no soft recreative drugs, no crossing the streets outside the marks ....)

i mean com'on most of them except maybe the walking around naked, and bungee jumping, and oral sex one are just common decency.

anyway back on topic. i don't think that iraq would go communist if the Coalition pulled out. it would get worse as it would break up into ethnic sub-states ruled by Iraqi ayatollahs. sort of like Iran is.

[Gisen 0]

There's *never* been a communist government on this planet. There have been several socialist governments that have claimed to be working towards communism, but calling them communist is like calling "The Democratic Republic of Congo" a democracy.

Please read previous posts.

[Tawalkana 0]

Quote[/b] ]

Let's face fact's here, if we pull out then terrorists will be on american soil. You wouldn't like that now would you?

You've been watching too much FOX kid

you have been watching to much CNN!

Here are some questions and answers the American people and foreigners need to know about the war in Iraq. What started it and the multiple reasons the US needed to go in. This will not be political correct so Liberals STFU!

1. What happened on 9/11?

Muslim Extremist hijacked air planes in flight decided to run them in to the Twin Towers that have people from many countries, not just from the United States. al-Qaeda and the Afghan mujahideen, ran by Osama Bin Laden claimed responsibility. He was located in Afghanistan. If he is still alive he is in Pakistan.

2. What does Afghanistan have to do with Iraq?

When we went in Afghanistan, multiple nations fighting in the war found documentation that pretty much stated that Saddam Hussein was pretty much gave all the equipment to al-Qaeda. Bombs, ak-47's, tanks, bmps, at weapons, aa weapons. Most of the equipment the US gave them in the 80's to fight off Russian either didn't work or was pretty much depleted. After their civil war with Northern Alliance. Finding this documentation pretty much gave the green light to look to see what Iraq has been up to lately other than just funding and providing for al-Qaeda.

3. Where their WMD's in Iraq?

I don't doubt it. After the Persian Gulf War and after Desert Fox, Saddam had his Nuclear Scientist and equipment on 18 Wheelers for mobility and escape. We gave Saddam enough time to destroy his weapons or move his weapons to another country like Syria, Iran, or Jordan even though he hates some of those countries.

4. Could this war be for Oil?

Yes it could be in which I could careless, take the oil... I highly doubt it though if you notice the prices at the pump. If this war was for oil, we would see prices back to your grandmothers day at like .55 cents a gallon.

5. Is this war for the Iraqi people?

No! As much as they say it is on TV, it isn't. If it is, we have the most retarded govt I have ever seen... worst than France. I doubt this war is for freedom, we would free countries closer to us than Iraq.

6. My opinion on the war

During Clinton's era as President... He decreased funding towards defense, created welfare and really pissed me off. I'm sorry for you tity babies who don't work and get a check from the govt... get off your lazy ass and work.. we might be able to decrease the deficit by leaps and bounds.... anyway defense budget was decreased by a lot. He is a hardcore liberal.. what did we expect. He had multiple chances to take out Osama Bin Laden, I think it was 8 chances and he didn't take a single one. We would never be in this war if it wasn't for Clinton. You can say someone would of stepped up and would of done it anyway, I highly disagree. Whoever would try and take his job would know that they where next. We never would of went into Afghanistan and we wouldn't of found the documentation or the so called WMD's and wouldn't of invaded either country. Also if the UN would do their damn job and inspect these countries and not just give power hunger war lords in Africa help this world would be a better place.

If we leave out of Iraq now, it will just become another Terrorist state and we will have to go back into Iraq in 5 to 10 years. You can go and check this but as a 18-25 year old have a better chance at survival in Iraq than the following cities Philadelphia, New Orleans, and Detriot.

Kofi Annan << bigger douche than John F Kerry.

[chops 111]

Well aside from the billions per week spent on Iraq, it seems there's some left over for connecting trailerparks to the internet.

[Gisen 0]

Here are some questions and answers the American people and foreigners need to know about the war in Iraq. What started it and the multiple reasons the US needed to go in. This will not be political correct so Liberals STFU!

Let me first state that I don't watch any of the American 'news' channels as they are all biased in one direction or another, mostly towards the republican side of view due to who owns them. Independent and publicly financed news such as the BBC tend to be more accurate, but are not infallible either.

Most of your points are factually incorrect.

Quote[/b] ][/1. What happened on 9/11?

Muslim Extremist hijacked air planes in flight decided to run them in to the Twin Towers that have people from many countries, not just from the United States. al-Qaeda and the Afghan mujahideen, ran by Osama Bin Laden claimed responsibility. He was located in Afghanistan. If he is still alive he is in Pakistan.

Al Quaeda ("the base") was a tiny organisation if it existed at all at this stage outside Bin Laden's head. The hijackers were mostly Saudis, but they were indeed united by their strong faith and manipulated by religious leaders into carrying out the attacks.

Quote[/b] ]

2. What does Afghanistan have to do with Iraq?

When we went in Afghanistan, multiple nations fighting in the war found documentation that pretty much stated that Saddam Hussein was pretty much gave all the equipment to al-Qaeda. Bombs, ak-47's, tanks, bmps, at weapons, aa weapons. Most of the equipment the US gave them in the 80's to fight off Russian either didn't work or was pretty much depleted. After their civil war with Northern Alliance. Finding this documentation pretty much gave the green light to look to see what Iraq has been up to lately other than just funding and providing for al-Qaeda.

Absolute nonsense. Saddam Hussein was hated by the religious extremists, and tried his best to remove them from Iraq as they were/ would compromise his power as absolute dictator. Dictators create a cult of personality around themselves that is very similar to a religion, so they don't like competition. See Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Mao Tse Tung, etc. There is NO evidence that he helped them in any way and substantial evidence that he was very much against them.

Quote[/b] ]3. Where[sic] their[sic] WMD's[sic] in Iraq?

I don't doubt it. After the Persian Gulf War and after Desert Fox, Saddam had his Nuclear Scientist and equipment on 18 Wheelers for mobility and escape. We gave Saddam enough time to destroy his weapons or move his weapons to another country like Syria, Iran, or Jordan even though he hates some of those countries.

And since they hate him back and wanted him out of power, the chances of them allowing him to do so are almost zero. You'd be more credible claiming Iranian special forces stole them.

This claim is absurd. You're claiming that none of these vehicles broke down, were captured or were seen by reconnaisance flights (as opposed to claiming that they are visible on satellite images)? Yes, Saddam HAD chemical weapons, because he was sold them by his buddies in the U.S., U.K. and so on. But he used most of them on the kurds, and if there were any left they either were destroyed or simply dismantled and hidden. None of these have been found, by the way. There were no such weapons 'ready to launch.'

Quote[/b] ]

4. Could this war be for Oil?

Yes it could be in which I could careless, take the oil... I highly doubt it though if you notice the prices at the pump. If this war was for oil, we would see prices back to your grandmothers day at like .55 cents a gallon.

How nice of you. Let's refrain from talking about your lack of humanity from now on.

Quote[/b] ]

5. Is this war for the Iraqi people?

No! As much as they say it is on TV, it isn't. If it is, we have the most retarded govt I have ever seen... worst than France. I doubt this war is for freedom, we would free countries closer to us than Iraq.

This is actually true

Quote[/b] ]

6. My opinion on the war

During Clinton's era as President... He decreased funding towards defense, created welfare and really pissed me off. I'm sorry for you tity babies who don't work and get a check from the govt... get off your lazy ass and work.. we might be able to decrease the deficit by leaps and bounds.... anyway defense budget was decreased by a lot. He is a hardcore liberal.. what did we expect. He had multiple chances to take out Osama Bin Laden, I think it was 8 chances and he didn't take a single one. We would never be in this war if it wasn't for Clinton. You can say someone would of stepped up and would of done it anyway, I highly disagree. Whoever would try and take his job would know that they where next. We never would of went into Afghanistan and we wouldn't of found the documentation or the so called WMD's and wouldn't of invaded either country. Also if the UN would do their damn job and inspect these countries and not just give power hunger war lords in Africa help this world would be a better place.

Don't you think its a bit simplistic to blame everything on clinton when Saddam was supported and nurtured by the US during and after his rise to power, and when GB senior could have 'finished the job' the first gulf conflict if there was a need to? I don't understand this tendency I see from a lot of Americans to polarise politics to make it seem that one party is always completely wrong and the other side is always completely right. It's tied into this ridiculous irrational hatred of 'liberals' from one side and vice versa. Anyone that votes for or against a party or person on the grounds of 'being a liberal' or not is a complete idiot. Newsflash America: None of the Democrats or Republicans are actually very 'liberal', in terms of what the word means.

I'm not liberal or conservative, I have a unique political viewpoint as does every other thinking person. Vote for whoever matches your personal political views, not a strawman created by hatred.

Quote[/b] ]

If we leave out of Iraq now, it will just become another Terrorist state and we will have to go back into Iraq in 5 to 10 years. You can go and check this but as a 18-25 year old have a better chance at survival in Iraq than the following cities Philadelphia, New Orleans, and Detriot.

Kofi Annan << bigger douche than John F Kerry.

It's already a terrorist state. And it's getting worse because America had no credibility in attacking it, and because right now there are American companies making huge amounts of money 'rebuilding' it. The troops mostly have good intentions (I was almost deployed to go to Iraq, BTW) but their very presence there is stirring up more problems. No matter what they do, there are going to be perceived civilian casualties and that is what causes other members of the family to hate the 'occupiers' enough to join 'the resistance,' becoming fighters or suicide bombers.

[baddo 0]

I'm sure if there actually were any of those claimed Weapons Of Mass Destruction in Iraq, I would have seen it by now as I keep a close eye on global news. I only saw a presentation made by the USA which showed some mobile lab (this was created on a computer, not real footage). I'm sure the USA has done everything it can to prove that there were WOMD in Iraq, but as they have not been able to show actual evidence to me, I have to say there wasn't any, and that the people who claimed there was, were simply put, wrong (or just lying to me).

[martinovic 0]

Quote[/b] ]2. What does Afghanistan have to do with Iraq?

When we went in Afghanistan, multiple nations fighting in the war found documentation that pretty much stated that Saddam Hussein was pretty much gave all the equipment to al-Qaeda. Bombs, ak-47's, tanks, bmps, at weapons, aa weapons. Most of the equipment the US gave them in the 80's to fight off Russian either didn't work or was pretty much depleted. After their civil war with Northern Alliance. Finding this documentation pretty much gave the green light to look to see what Iraq has been up to lately other than just funding and providing for al-Qaeda.

That's such a huge pile of crap i cannot read what you wrote any further. I am sorry for the harsh language.

Saddam Hussein was a secular progressive dictator. He was against Islam, he forbade the wearing of the veil in public workplaces, was against beards and other Islamic things, this is a fact. He was hated by the entire arab world, despite being sunni. Saudi Arabia hated them, every single sunni extremist hated them. Al Qaeda hated them.

Al Qaeda's weapons come from China, bought with Saudi Arabian money. Do you honestly think that it was Iraq who gave them equipment? Al Qaeda had a bounty on Saddams head, why would Saddam give them weapons? He wasn't as stupid as the American Brass to give their enemies guns. (hellooooo Iraqi sunnis, want some guns?)

Add to that that Iran wouldn't have ever allowed Iraq to help the taliban anyway. Iran is fully shiite and they have been feuding with the sunni Pushtun of Aghanistan for ages. Iran is right between Iraq and Afghanistan, they have a tight grip on the area and sunni have no support among the homogenously shiite country. So even geographically it is impossible that Iraq could've supplied Afghan Mujahideen with weapons.

edit: One more thing. Al Qaedas weapons also come from the United States of America. At present time. The US goverment has started supporting sunni extermist groups in opposition to shiite extermists (who hate the USA more than the sunnis). Not just in Iraq, but all over the middle-east. This lead to the support of Syrian extremist groups, which supply Al Qaeda with guns and intelligence.

Here's how the USA's strategy evolved in the regarding muslims:

-Sunnis hate Russians! Let's give 'em guns.

-Those taliban dudes seem to be the most organized of 'em.

-*9/11*

-*grunt* Muslims are baaaaad. They want us deaaaad. *grrrr*

-Overthere! Taliba... erm, Al Qaeda! Attaaaack!

-Mightaswell take care of Iraq while we're up.

-Ouch, these are shiites! They're stingier than sunnis! ahhh!

-Sunnis hate Shiites! Let's give 'em guns.

[Hoot1988 0]

Quote[/b] ]2. What does Afghanistan have to do with Iraq?

When we went in Afghanistan, multiple nations fighting in the war found documentation that pretty much stated that Saddam Hussein was pretty much gave all the equipment to al-Qaeda. Bombs, ak-47's, tanks, bmps, at weapons, aa weapons. Most of the equipment the US gave them in the 80's to fight off Russian either didn't work or was pretty much depleted. After their civil war with Northern Alliance. Finding this documentation pretty much gave the green light to look to see what Iraq has been up to lately other than just funding and providing for al-Qaeda.

you defiantly have been watching too much FOX! thats absolute BS. All the equipment al-Quadea have was supplied by the US and UK during the Afgan soviet war, or stolen off the soviets, and most of that was taken by the taliban or Northern alliance. where is this documentation? probably in the same place as Iraqs WMD in G.W. Bush mind!

if you want the truth read routers everything else has a bias view point, although i watch sky news religiously i always follow up stuff im interested in with a trip to www.reuters.com .

Quote[/b] ]you've been watching too much FOX kid

lol Fox lost all credibility when i saw they reported that Hezbolla had Iraqs WMD.

booradley60 thanks for the correct spelling getting lazy in my young age

[booradley60 0]

He/she means www.reuters.com.

(Unless, of course, you're searching for network solutions for your business.)

Quote[/b] ]4. Could this war be for Oil?

Yes it could be in which I could careless, take the oil... I highly doubt it though if you notice the prices at the pump. If this war was for oil, we would see prices back to your grandmothers day at like .55 cents a gallon.

I would hope that one of the biggest debacles in the history of American foreign policy was not inspired by an episode of Scooby Doo. However, I find it more delusional if not sinister that the administration had its eyes on Iraq from the moment it took office and had grand ideas about going down in history as champions of freedom. I hear that the administration didn't plan for the postwar. Wouldn't it be ironic if the postwar turned out to be the only thing they'd planned before the war started?

[Yeb 0]

Quote[/b] ]3. Where their WMD's in Iraq?

I don't doubt it. After the Persian Gulf War and after Desert Fox, Saddam had his Nuclear Scientist and equipment on 18 Wheelers for mobility and escape. We gave Saddam enough time to destroy his weapons or move his weapons to another country like Syria, Iran, or Jordan even though he hates some of those countries.

Iraq was continuously bombed between 1991 and 2003 by the US, Great Britain and even France! This was meant to destroy mainly army, intelligence, baas iraqy installations and...wmd/nuclear sites. According to the Pentagone, about 280 000 air raids were carried out between 1991 and 2001. And do not forget the war iran-irak which was a total disaster economically and military for Iraq (despite the US and Saudi Arabia support), then the first gulf war and its embargo...I really doubt there were lies about wmds as they were certainly destroyed, except from the US government...and i guess if they would have found them, i'm pretty sure it would not have stayed as a secret, and hence, totally discredit bush's administration.

Quote[/b] ]4. Could this war be for Oil?

Yes it could be in which I could careless, take the oil... I highly doubt it though if you notice the prices at the pump. If this war was for oil, we would see prices back to your grandmothers day at like .55 cents a gallon.

The prices at the pump are mainly due to the rarefaction, the OPEC policy and the situation in irak (the oil production is very very low at the moment: who would invest in one of the most dangerous country?), and overall, in the middle east. A lot of speculation, a demand over the offer, and you get these prices.

Moreover, do not forget the first buildings heavily guarded by the us army was the oil minister (can't remind the exact name), so the war for oil can be an assumption, right?

Quote[/b] ]5. Is this war for the Iraqi people?

No! As much as they say it is on TV, it isn't. If it is, we have the most retarded govt I have ever seen... worst than France. I doubt this war is for freedom, we would free countries closer to us than Iraq.

I do not think France acted such for iraqi people at all, but more for the several contracts and the stabililty in the area (France is highly respected in middle east). But right now, i'am not able to say what's the "less worst", saddam or the actual situation... You're right though.

Quote[/b] ]6. My opinion on the war

During Clinton's era as President... He decreased funding towards defense, created welfare and really pissed me off. I'm sorry for you tity babies who don't work and get a check from the govt... get off your lazy ass and work.. we might be able to decrease the deficit by leaps and bounds.... anyway defense budget was decreased by a lot. He is a hardcore liberal.. what did we expect. He had multiple chances to take out Osama Bin Laden, I think it was 8 chances and he didn't take a single one. We would never be in this war if it wasn't for Clinton. You can say someone would of stepped up and would of done it anyway, I highly disagree. Whoever would try and take his job would know that they where next. We never would of went into Afghanistan and we wouldn't of found the documentation or the so called WMD's and wouldn't of invaded either country. Also if the UN would do their damn job and inspect these countries and not just give power hunger war lords in Africa help this world would be a better place.

About the deficit, when Clinton became president, the us deficit was huge, thanks to his and Federal Reserve policy, the debt was no more, until the debt appeared again with George W. Bush, i admit those two periods are hard to compare (a war to finance, etc...), but the problem is there.

Moreover, the invasion of Iraq has been planned under Clinton administration, the us always wanted to invade iraq since 1991 (i do not know why they did not do it during the frst gulf war), they just lacked a pretext that Bush did not miss with 9/11.

There was no document about iraqi wmd in afghanistan, or give us a link or a proof. And we're still waiting for wmd in irak, so is Bush.

Quote[/b] ]If we leave out of Iraq now, it will just become another Terrorist state and we will have to go back into Iraq in 5 to 10 years. You can go and check this but as a 18-25 year old have a better chance at survival in Iraq than the following cities Philadelphia, New Orleans, and Detriot.

Saddam was certainly the best protection against terrorism in iraq. USA just created what they were supposed looking for: terrorism. Anyway, the us should not leave out iraq now imho, even iraqis know it, because it would turn into a civil war nightmare which would be a disaster for the whole middle east, though the civil war has already begun, i'm sure the result would be worst if the us was not there.

Anyway, usa has a huge military and diplomatic potential, but has a totally lack of cultural knowledge and the actual situation in iraq proves it every day.

Country, community and people are not only pawns, they have to be respected as well as their culture. The usa are just collecting what they sowed during the cold war.

Despite what i wrote above, i respect this great country and more over, its people. We just can not always agree with some of its foreign policy.

[0311 0]

Nothing makes me more sick than hearing people discuss the political situation in Iraq based upon things they have seen on the news on TV.

Talk to any US combat troop who has been there, pretty much most of everything you hear or see in the news is bs. Either by fabrication/misinformation by our own govt, or due to the lack of understanding on part of the media.

When my unit returned from Ar Ramadi(Al Anbar province), we basically did what no other unit could do. We for the most part tamed the entire city. Yeah, it's still a dangerous place. But not nearly the "worst city in Iraq" as it was aptly titled when we arrived there last Sept.

The truth is, we gave the Iraqi Army and Police more than all the training and tools they ever wanted from us for them to do their job and keep the city secure. And honestly, they are easily capable of doing that. The problem that we saw why we are still there today is because the Iraqi forces need to get their act together. If you have a group of soldiers who don't like having to deal with discomfort, fear, danger, and all of the other things normal soldiers have to face, then you arn't going to have a very disciplined force. Some of that is cultural, teaching them to bathe, prepare their food in a sanitary way, properly relieve themselves. Most of the guys over there had their mothers wiping up after themselves til they were 40.

It's like the saying, You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. Guys there are dying fast because they don't want to wear their helmets, or their flak jackets because they think it's too heavy, or they don't want to follow instruction.

They're not all so bad, alot of them are willing to learn and do things properly. But we are facing a horrible cultural dillema in regards to owning up to personal responsibility and hard work on part of Iraqi forces over there.

Anyhow, we can't stay there forever. Eventually, it's gotta be either sink or swim.